columbia wrote:At its worst, this is a completely neutral move.I don't understand the hand wringing.

i guess if you're someone who has become a "fan" of depres and/or bortuzzo, you would be disappointed to see their position on the team potentially compromised. it would also create a lack of faith in the decision making of the pens management, which is never fun.

i don't think it's worth freaking out about, but i get it if people don't like the move.

Nonetheless, there's no reason to believe that Bortuzzo would be in the press box because of Eaton.That's already happening because of their choice of Engelland.

Rookies are handled like that when being eased into the NHL. Play a few games sit one or two. It keeps them from getting burned out and gives them a different perspective on the game. It also motivates them to be better and force the coaches to make the decision that they cannot be benched. I have no problem with how the coaching staff has been handling the rookies.

i understnad people being upset about a younger player losing time or getting demoted but we have no idea how hes going to be used right now. Lets wait and see how they choose to use him before we all jump to conclusions. I havent seen Eaton play for awhile so i have no idea how good he is. If he plays a limited role i dont see a big deal even if hes not good. And if hes really bad we can just get rid of him.

i want to see how they use him first before i decide if i like this or hate this

Froggy wrote:Controversial opinion: despres is worth more long term in a trade than he is in our line up.

Actually my friend and I were talking about that after Sunday's game. He was of the opinion you trade Despres and keep Letang. I played devil's advocate and said you trade Letang (who'll command big bucks very soon), and keep the cheaper yet similar (and at this point concussion free)Despres.

If you're going to have this flowing pipeline of defensemen, I like the idea of cycling them in to one contract after the entry level and then parting ways if they price themselves out. Keep the defense young and inexpensive. You gotta have a couple vets though, Martin, Orpik spread out through the lineup. Maybe it makes sense for one of these young defensemen to stay when Martin is gone. But for the most part, if Shero is going to keep drafting them, use them then ditch them(for something if possible) once they are gonna be too expensive.

Froggy wrote:Controversial opinion: despres is worth more long term in a trade than he is in our line up.

Unlike most crap that's flung at walls to test adhesion here...this is actually an interesting point. It's in the realm of possibility at least. Not that I'm advocating it currently...

First thing I would need to know is how much does Letang expect to get paid and for how long. If he'll go 5 years at a cap hit of 5.5M I keep him. If he starts getting into 6M+ that makes it much harder. It really all depends on how much Letang will want in his next contract. The other thing I'm apprehensive about is his hockey sense in terms of the PP. He's never quite sure whether to pass, shoot, or what to do. His shot selection is usually very poor and he still hasn't found the proper touch to feed players for one-timers. If he wants that #1 Norris candidate money he has to give that total package.

I don't think you trade Letang. He'll be easily worth the $6 m he'll get by the team 2014-15 rolls around. He'll be mature, entering his prime (which is later for defensemen than forwards). You need that type of player to solidify an elite D corp.

I'm more of the mind that the best strategy with these young defensemen is to have them compete against each other, the way Letang and Goligoski were brought up, and we kept the one we liked more, traded the other.

Though the concept of cycling through the defense could be applied too. But in this case Letang will take over the top paid position (previously held by Gonchar then Martin), Despres will take Letang's young stud on a 2nd contract slot, and Morrow will take the EL slot. I think Orpik will need to fall back to a #4-5 guy if he wants to stay on the team. Maybe Bort takes his slot in the top 4 if he's still on the team. That leaves Martin as the redundancy, which if he keeps up his play, I'd be fine with for 1 year.

pcm wrote:I'm more of the mind that the best strategy with these young defensemen is to have them compete against each other, the way Letang and Goligoski were brought up, and we kept the one we liked more, traded the other.

letang and goligoski were never lumped together like this. if there ever was a competition, letang won it 3 years before gogo was traded

Froggy wrote:Controversial opinion: despres is worth more long term in a trade than he is in our line up.

what percentage of this opinion is based on our surplus of dmen vs. our drought of forwards?

it's a few factors.

-what you said-I'm not as enamored with despres as some around here are. -I know despres is young and hasn't reached his ceiling yet, but I really like what I saw out of Morrow last year, and from what I've read, Harrington probably projects higher than him, too. If he's going to be a #4 guy here, and we can turn that into a legit winger, then why not?

Froggy wrote:Controversial opinion: despres is worth more long term in a trade than he is in our line up.

Unlike most crap that's flung at walls to test adhesion here...this is actually an interesting point. It's in the realm of possibility at least. Not that I'm advocating it currently...

It is an interesting point. Despres was essential when Niskanen and Martin were big question marks. But now we don't need him in the top 4 until 2014-15. And as far as trade value goes, seeing the difference between our top line with 2 bonafide top 6 wingers vs. 1 makes me think that to propel this team to "unstoppable force" realm, we need 2 killer scoring lines. We can probably get away with Bennett or Dupuis in the top 6, but not both. That means we need a winger who can score.

But all that said, I really don't want to trade Despres. I like this team being rich on defense right now. I want a young guy to get playoff experience so that he's ready to step in sooner than later. I'd say trade from the prospect pool instead.

Honestly, I'd like to push Niskanen down to being a #5 again...he just can't play a top-4 role I don't think...in order for that to be so, we need Despres to be in the top-4...that's a lot of potential in Despres in terms of size and skating ability to just dump...I'd be very hesitant about it...very...

I'd continue this audition right through the playoffs if I had a choice, see if you can get a read on who ups their game and who can't...hopefully a couple of these in and out guys grasp the playoffs right away and make the decision a little easier because we don't have long to figure it all out...

I really want to see Bortuzzo in the playoffs. He looks like a quiet kind of guy, with a monster hidden away inside him. If pairing him with Niskanen on the bottom pair and moving Despres up to the top 4 means they both get to play and Engelland sits, then I'm all for it.

sil wrote:For the right package at the deadline, would you be inclined to trade Niskanen? I would.

Heck yeah, Nisky is ok and all and he is not an untouchable but we got enough puck movers on the blue line. But if you are getting rid of Nisky i think you need to bring in a replacement. Just some one a touch more defensive and more physical.

But if you are thinking of moving Nisky and using what we have here and in the minors i would have to say no.

pcm wrote:I really want to see Bortuzzo in the playoffs. He looks like a quiet kind of guy, with a monster hidden away inside him. If pairing him with Niskanen on the bottom pair and moving Despres up to the top 4 means they both get to play and Engelland sits, then I'm all for it.

I agree completely. Bylsma is hell bent on playing Engelland and Adams every single game. They are valuable players, but they'd be better for depth. Vitale has more speed and energy than Adams and he wins more draws. Bortuzzo and Despres are both better then Engelland right now, and they will improve ONLY WITH playing time. My point is, players with an upside need to play, or they won't get better. I think a better coach could get more out of guys like Glass, Vitale, and Kennedy, quite frankly. And Bortuzzo and Despres either need to play every night, be traded, or go back to WBS and play every night.

There is no absolutely no way I would trade Despres. He's 20, so young and going to be really good down the road. Same thing with Bortuzzo. Both need to be in the lineup every night.

I like how Niskanen has played, but probably a number 5 on the D. Engelland needs to be the teams #7 or sent in part of a trade. He is not part of the future. We will just have to see how things progress with Martin and Orpik over the course of the rest of this year and next, although I think Orpik's leadership on the team will always put him ahead of Martin in the pecking order. Pay Letang what he is due. He is part of the core of this team and is that good imo and is still very young.

pcm wrote:I really want to see Bortuzzo in the playoffs. He looks like a quiet kind of guy, with a monster hidden away inside him. If pairing him with Niskanen on the bottom pair and moving Despres up to the top 4 means they both get to play and Engelland sits, then I'm all for it.

I agree completely. Bylsma is hell bent on playing Engelland and Adams every single game. They are valuable players, but they'd be better for depth. Vitale has more speed and energy than Adams and he wins more draws. Bortuzzo and Despres are both better then Engelland right now, and they will improve ONLY WITH playing time. My point is, players with an upside need to play, or they won't get better. I think a better coach could get more out of guys like Glass, Vitale, and Kennedy, quite frankly. And Bortuzzo and Despres either need to play every night, be traded, or go back to WBS and play every night.

I disagree with your comparison of Vitale to Adams in the context of your post because Adams isn't playing at Vitale's expense. They're on the same line.

I also disagree that they need to play Despres and Bortuzzo every game. They need to play, yes, but not every game, especially in a shortened season like this where you're playing basically every other night. I'm also afraid of throwing out an all-rookie pairing during the playoffs.

Also, a better coach couldn't get more out of Vitale, Kennedy, and Glass because frankly, they don't really have much more to give.